TaylorMade Teases 2019 #ScrewFace Driver

In what surely must be the latest example of coincidence within the golf equipment world, on the same day that Callaway’s Epic Flash line of drivers landed on the USGA’s conforming clubs list, TaylorMade released a short teaser video for its upcoming 2019 drivers.

Promising that, on February 1st, #EverbodyGetsFaster (that’s the official hashtag), TaylorMade revealed the face of its new models. While you can be sure that Twist Face persists, 2019’s twist (I booed myself) is a pair of red screws positioned in the low heel and toe of the face. Isn’t that interesting?

Racecar wheels, jet engines, and some sort of flaming reaction. Oh my, that is fast.

Let’s be real, far too often golfers behave like fish. That is to say; we’re easily distracted by shiny objects and sometimes bite on things we shouldn’t. TaylorMade knows this, and so it also knows that doing something that hasn’t been done since the days of persimmon – like putting big screws in the face of a driver – is sure to attract attention to its face technology in a year when face technology will be all the rage.

Behind the screws will be a story about faster, and more to the point, more consistent ball speed, across more of the face. That’s how you, me, and everybody else is going to get faster. TaylorMade will talk about how it made the face so fast, it needed the screws and other structures to help slow it down and bring it back under the USGA limit. Every brand has told a version of this story at one time or another, but in golf, everything old is perpetually new again. Along similar lines, TaylorMade will recycle a story from the Adams XTD driver and say that every face is individually inspected and measured to ensure that CT is at the USGA limit at multiple points.

Depending on your predilections, the screws might be cool, but I’d wager that what’s closer to reality is that whatever difference-making technology there is, it’s mostly out of sight. Inside the head, the face will feature variable thickness, goo-filled structures – pockets of sorts – which is how TaylorMade will say it can better control CT. The screws, not unlike Cobra’s Space Port, they’re the visible bits to raise awareness of what you can’t see. That’s my thinking on the subject anyway. I’m open to being proven wrong.

An updated track weighting system is also said to be part of the package.

The Next Big Thing or the Next Big Bust?

TaylorMade very well could be setting the trend with the next big thing, but I’m not without my concerns. Feedback from industry insiders and experts can be summed up in two words: Structural failure. What happens when a golfer hits the ball on the screws? No matter how far from center the screws may be, they’re going to get hit, and the thinking is that the screws may weaken the surrounding titanium and cause cracks. We’d wager TaylorMade has put the new design through its paces, but the same was probably said about the original M series drivers (crowns cracking), and several generations of face slot irons (slots splitting), so there is some legitimate quality control history with new TaylorMade technologies that should rightfully raise eyebrows.

It also remains to be seen what the weight penalty is for adding screws and goo to the face. It’s certainly possible that TaylorMade has made the technology weight-neutral, but at a time when everyone else is scrambling to remove weight from the face and push mass lower and deeper, it’s at least interesting that TaylorMade appears to be adding forward mass. Reality to be determined when we can get the new heads on our Auditor CG gauge, but one of the near-universal truths in golf equipment design is that structures bring with them mass penalties.

Finally, to the best of my knowledge, nobody has asked TaylorMade what they mean when they say at the limit. Technically that’s 239 microseconds, but with tolerances, it’s possible to push it a bit further. Even the most aggressive brands, however, tend to play in the low 240s. Much higher, even if you’re still below 257 microseconds, and the USGA is likely to issue warnings and start digging a bit deeper. Nobody wants that. Point being, while consistency across the face shouldn’t be downplayed, it needs to be made clear that you can’t measure your way to a ball speed breakthrough.

GIVEAWAY: Win a Shot Scope V2 prize package

Shot Scope Golf

Enter MyGolfSpy’s Giveaway!

It should go without saying that it’s a little early in the game to say whether or not the #ScrewFace (that one’s not official) technology works. The early performance reports on the new drivers (reportedly M5 and M6) have been universally excellent, with the M6 being the more noteworthy of two. Those without the proverbial skin in the game that we’ve heard from rates the TaylorMade stuff a touch higher than Callaway’s Epic Flash, which I suppose is a good sign for TaylorMade. Caveat emptor; early reviews are almost always positive. Actual reality will be determined once consumers get involved.

If nothing else, the early comparisons illustrate how myopic the industry tends to be with respect to the marketplace. It’s a reasonable assumption that the new gear from Callaway and TaylorMade is going to be good, but to talk about this in binary terms is silly. It’s by no stretch one or the other. As we discussed in our recent podcast, 2019 is shaping up to be the best year for drivers ever, and if the conversation in your head doesn’t include PING, Cobra, Mizuno, Srixon, Wilson, Titleist, PXG (and a qualified fitter), you’re doing yourself a disservice.

As we inch closer to the start of the buying season, my advice is this: Don’t be a fish. Shiny things don’t matter. What matters are mass properties and ball speed. Everything else is just a distraction, and it can be far too easy to lose sight of that when 95% of what passes for innovation in golf equipment is just clever marketing.

Tony Covey

Tony is the Editor of MyGolfSpy where his job is to bring fresh and innovative content to the site.
In addition to his editorial responsibilities, he was instrumental in developing MyGolfSpy's data-driven testing methodologies and continues to sift through our data to find the insights that can help improve your game.
Tony believes that golfers deserve to know what's real and what's not, and that means MyGolfSpy's equipment coverage must extend beyond the so-called facts as dictated by the same companies that created them.
Most of all Tony believes in performance over hype and #PowerToThePlayer.

62 Comments

Brent

6 months ago

I always am amazed why so many people are mad about every new release….Granted TM and Cally release clubs faster than Titleist or Ping but they all have to come up with some marketing new thing every year just to sell something “new”…..Maybe it is a joke and maybe it won’t be much better but its a choice and nobody is forced to buy anything. Sure it gets annoying that every 6 months someone supposedly has something 2 yards longer…lol but it is what it is and golfers love to tinker with stuff so that will never change

TenBuck

6 months ago

I don’t know anything about the screws but I’m willing wo do a wait and see. Switched from Epic to Ping G400MAX and really haven’t looked back. No interest right now in switching but curious about the technology involved. I wonder if they will involve speed foam in anyway behind the face??

Doug

6 months ago

It seems like horizontal jailbreak type of tech, but I see 2 potential issues with this type of tech on the face, 1) higher potential for fatigue of the screws when struck, which ultimately leads to a lost screw and 2) extreme differential of material and density if you take a shot off the toe or heel, which is bound to behave considerably differently. I’m betting for sure if you take one off the screw, your arms are going to know about it!

Maybe it’s a non-issue, but I don’t know how you’d resolve the difference in density.

Gerald Teigrob

6 months ago

That would be a concern as well for me, Doug! As with anything new like this, I will not jump on the bandwagon and upgrade to this driver until I see more data and see what kind of feedback others are getting.. Just because TM sponsored pros use these clubs doesn’t mean I would go ahead and play them, expecting me to have the same distance and accuracy as they do1

Gerald Teigrob

6 months ago

What will TM think of next? I am not sure this is the direction to go…but then I have moved on from TM. No they don’t bring out a different club every month…but screws on the face? I think that is overdoing the whole adjustability thing. I am happy to adjust my clubs without the added face plant adjustment. Good luck with that TM…I am not so sure this will be a big selling feature for me or others I know.

CC

Gerald Teigrob

Wow…and you are mister intelligent! Thanks for being the village idiot and trying to insult my intelligence! You wasted your time to say this? How about your own ignorance? Two can play that game!

Mark

6 months ago

The screws are a visible way for TM to show that they can place resin in the heal and toe and make every driver much closer to the legal limit. Anyone in the business knows that manufacturer tolerances mean some heads are hotter than other and the hot heads go to the tour. What they are showing is that they can now make every head hot. Or at least that is the story our rep gave us.

Kirsen

6 months ago

Speaking of structures with mass penalties, I have yet to test any golf club with any sort of sliding weight track incorporated into the sole that performs anywhere near as well as clubs that have a simple, well designed, interchangeable weighting system.

When I first saw the teaser TV ad, I thought perhaps Taylormade’s new story would be about how weight tracks are a waste of weight, but now that I know that these screws are on the face of the club, I’m not sure what to think.

I’d agree. It falls under the trade-off curve that the PING engineers like to talk about. Movable weights require structure. Simple 2-position systems require less structure, but they still require more structure than a fixed weight system. It shouldn’t surprise anyone that well-engineered fixed weight drivers are often among the top performers, or at the very least, allow for more aggressive weighting and CG placement.

Odie

6 months ago

Tony,
A two part question I’d appreciate your opinion on:
1. How much distance could be gained if a major OEM built a driver with NO USGA constraints (ie nor COR limits).
2. If said club were engineered, how well would it sell to consumers?
I recall Callaway built a non-conforming driver several years ago, but I know the technologies have changed. I think with all top drivers being so close, performance wise, if an OEM built one that actually DID give you 20 extra yards it would sell. I think golfers playing non- tournament golf, who didn’t necessarily follow full USGA Rules, would make a club like this a tremendous success.
Keep up the great work.

I don’t have a number, but I’d wager it’s significant. 20 yards sounds easily achievable – especially if you paired it with a non-conforming balls

The reality is that just about every prototype created during the development process comes back hot. So when TM starts talking about every driver leaving the factory over the limit, that’s really nothing special. Everybody invariably has to slow down designs (thicken faces, add structure) to slow down the face. Fast is easy. Slowing it down takes effort.

As for how it would sell…that’s tough to say. There are non-conforming drivers out there right now, but nothing from a major manufacturer. The USGA would frown upon any of those guys releasing a non-conforming model for the recreational crowd. It could create headaches with the USGA for the mainstream/conforming stuff, and so I think that’s where the sticking point is.

Jeff

Gerald Teigrob

6 months ago

Jeff, that wouldn’t surprise me. That reminds me of TM when they eventually bought out Adams Golf. They were already trying to capitalize on Adams Golf Engineering and technology with the velocity slot hybrids and drivers/fairway woods. I wonder how much tech sharing the bigger equipment companies like TM and Callaway work together. If there was too obvious of the same thing, that borders on copyright infringement, but when you look for example at what irons Tiger plays – TGR TM irons, for instance – they are essentially the specs he played with Titlieist, Nike, and now TM. So since the specs are especially geared for Tiger, he essentially takes his specs with him wherever he goes. So essentially his irons are Titleist/Nike/TM irons combo.

Brad

Spitfisher

6 months ago

I find a majority of these comments, these folks are so out of touch and talk a big game. Taylormade and all the other companies make fine drivers, distance between one over the other is within a couple of yards. Taylormade has innovated over the decades, many of those spear headed innovations are here today in several of the brands and models. Take twist face for example- most don’t understand it but it really really works. Just because Taylormade or callaway come out with a new driver, it doesn’t mean its for you…More likely than not someone with a 3+ year old driver will love it.

Gerald Teigrob

6 months ago

I actually want my drivers and other adjustable clubs to be less complicated. I am playing a Bio Cell adjustable driver. I don’t need these added bells and whistles to as Bobby Clampett would say “confuse the heck out of me.” The KISS principle works best here. Thankfully Cobra hasn’t bent that way…and even if they do, I won’t benefit from this technology. Just like I|have always prefered adjusted lengths for my irons. Maybe I am old school there, but it it works, for me why change? We’ve already seen that driver length has limitations…especially when drivers max out at 46″ and more pros play to 44′ for their divers and 42′ for their 3 woods.

Christopher

6 months ago

Unfortunately visible tech sells golf equipment, so the soles of our drivers are designed for Rack Appeal™, the average consumer wants to see sliding and movable weights. The “simpler” a driver looks the cheaper it looks.

Gerald Teigrob

6 months ago

Chris, that’s true but for someone like myself, I am just getting used to adjustability in my Cobra Bio Cell technology. By using screws in the front right or left that would personally detract from what I am trying to accomplish with those clubs. Would that include adjustments for draw or fade bias? I tend to prefer that included with my loft adjustments not separately.

THOMAS

6 months ago

the more i read the more i am becoming disinfranchized
absolutly non of this marketing hip matters to anyone who knows anything about the game of golf overall

scott

6 months ago

Question Aren’t all major club makers at the COR limits and have been for years ? If this is true they just making the same can opener but with screws or weights ( big & small light or heavy ) one year on the bottom next year on the sides foam filled or speed slot and the best yet speed bumps because they can’t make them go any farther you just as well make them look faster . Keep up the good work because a sucker is born every spring.

Yes and no. First, there hasn’t been a COR rule in years. It’s nuanced, but CT is the actual metric used. It’s meant to simulate COR because testing actual COR consistently can be problematic. So that said, you have the limit (237 microseconds), you have your maximum value with tolerances (257 microseconds), you have the threshold that will get you a warning letter and a possible investigation from the USGA (250 microseconds), and you have OEM design targets (~239-245 microseconds). Finally, you have any given manufacturers ability to hit their target with each part.

What shouldn’t get lost in this story is that for the past several years, TaylorMade has appeared to set conservative CT targets (below industry average), we’ve also been told that actual CTs from part to part haven’t been particularly consistent. So with M5/M6, I expect they’ll be a hell of a good story, but the reality underneath it will be nothing more than more aggressive CT targets and an effort to reign in sloppy tolerances.

So, anyone who compares CT from a new model to an old TM driver will likely see significant improvements giving the illusion that TM has really done something.

Here’s the rub though. 10 CT points is good for roughly 1/2 MPH of ball speed (assuming a 100MPH swing and centered contact). It’s also should be mentioned that no matter what the CT is, there is ALWAYS a penalty for missing the sweet spot, so even if your CT is 245 at every point on the face, ball speed is always going to drop when you miss the sweet spot.

Brendan

therod

6 months ago

The dual face thing was done years ago by KZG, the Gemini. And it was a GREAT head. Still have mine, and still contemplate shafting it up and putting it back in the bag. Still one of the all-around best heads I’ve ever hit.

BB

6 months ago

WINNER!!!
Yes, the bottom of the face/sole says…”SPEED INJECTED”
Speedfoam will be injected thru the screw holes and will be behind the ultra thin face just like in the P790 iron.
This will allow increased speed and better consistency across the face.
BRILLIANT!

HDTVMAN

6 months ago

So, Callaway has stainless-steel pins holding the crown and sole tightly together to create an extremely fast face with “Jail Break”. Now TM has “screwed” the twist face to the cage to produce more speed! I wonder if you can tighten the screws to flatten the face!!! It all comes down to speed…how fast you can reach the 19th hole!

Dan

6 months ago

First, the jailbreak bars are titanium (steel is too heavy to put up front) and they’re cast into the body not added to it.. Second, any face adjusting tech is non conforming. Callaway stuff is far superior. They r and d’ed for 5 years to get it right. 1 bar, 3 bars, in different places in the head, they even cut them in half to see the performance if they failed. TaylorMade’s stuff breaks at an almost unacceptable rate. When you work in a golf shop you see first hand what comes back. Ping, Cobra, and Titleist hardly ever break and they are all behind calmly and arm in distance, but their accuracy is better. Just pick your poison. Like cars get a Hellcat or a Civic, but don’t think they are comparable, apples and oranges.

Always have and always will hate TM drivers. Wouldn’t care if they were giving them away, wouldn’t try one. Wouldn’t take one. They could make them self automated like cars, and I wouldn’t use it. Ping forever.

Gerald Teigrob

Great write up on the pending TM release. Like you said, what’s old is new and all companies tend to “borrow” concepts from one another.. adjustable weights, lofts etc have become commonplace across the industry.

So, I’m predicting the screws (which are adjustable weights, as they have the exact same star screw pattern as other adjustable features) are actually inserted into two stabilizing bars, like callaway “jailbreak” tech, but instead of running vertically from crown to sole plate they are horizontal from face of the club to the butt section.

Just my prediction. I am also very curious to learn how this affects feel, sound and obviously performance. This represents a big design risk for TM. whom, after years of dominating new driver sales fell behind callaway Epic in 17 and Ping g400 in 18 (i believe not certain) and they really need a rebound for their flagship product.

TM also has a bit of a more tenuous financial situation. As other companies are able to offset the high R&D costs of hard goods with a large percentage of sales in their branded apparel and merch lines. (i see callaway shirts/hats/pants/gloves EVERYWHERE from Macy’s to Marshalls you basically never see TM stuff at retail outside of golf shops).

Robin

P.J.

6 months ago

TaylorMade has built solid drivers over the year, either winning or at the top of most distance tests. Having said that, TM has had a lot of things that was initially called gimmicks, then became standards. Stuff like metal drivers, adjustable weights, adjustable lofts, speed slots, speed pockets, face slots, and SpeedFoam . So I’ll keep an open mind until I see the specs and driver comparison’s (specifically from MyGolfSpy).
More than anything else, I’m glad there’s a new M5/M6 coming, so the prices on the M4 will come down and I can finally get the driver I’ve been really targeting!!

James

M5 and M6 will be $499 and $549.
M4 is set to stick around for a while and drop to $349.99 at some point…probably in Q1.
If you don’t want to wait or want to pay even less than $349, I have mint grade A demos for $259.99 right now. Complete with warranty, headcover and wrench. Hit me up if you want one. I had 400 and I’m down to about 150 in about 2 months time.

seabass

6 months ago

I am interested. How do I contact you?

olivier

6 months ago

I’m pretty there are people in the medical industry who could modify your bone structure in order to optimize your golf swing. It’s not unheard of to have bone growth in areas that limit flexibility or cause pain that can be removed. so just take the next step:

Hey doc, my coach and I have determined that my lack of shoulder flexibility is reducing my distance potential with the driver. could you tweak these bones a bit so I can make a fuller turn?

Dave B

6 months ago

Let’s see; if I’d taken advantage of every TM “breakthrough” technology over the last several years, I should be flying my drives about 330 with another 40 yards roll. Not bad for a skinny 70-year-old with a sub-90 swing speed. Next . . .

Andrew Han

Jim

6 months ago

Interesting take on the upcoming TM driver and their claim to gain more speed/ yards, etc. (can we say 17 more yards). I am curious about your comments about splitting drivers and irons and structural failure as I have never seen anything written about this before. Maybe it’s time for an article about the multi-material clubs and their failure rate as opposed to the more similar material offerings from Ping and Titleist? With all the different materials being used, especially, in drivers these days that would be a very interesting review. That said ‘hitting it on the screws’ does bring back some nostalgia at the very least.

jeff w

6 months ago

I had a TM iron w/ face slot tech that had cracked and need to be replaced (they were very good about sending a brand new club out immediately) and I have a buddy who’s M4 3w totally caved in when he badly miss-hit a shot.

Their QC isn’t always the best. But they do a very nice job of standing behind their product and making it right for consumer when they can

I will certainly be looking to demo several of these drivers and go see a fitter once I have narrowed the selection down to 2 or 3. Based on past experience though, it is unlikely that either Taylormade or Callaway will make it into my bag. They’ve never offered enough distance to make me forgo a better looking, better sounding, and more accurate driver.

Jerry

SImmsa

6 months ago

Never been happy with Tour Edge…still have a Ex 9 that hits nothing but fades….tried adjusting it on range again today as my TM was getting a grip…even the “Good” player next to me hit several different setting and everyone of his had a fade?

colin

6 months ago

I agree Jerry, looking forward to putting a 299$ driver up against a 500$ driver to see the difference, love my tour edge hybrids, but they are hard to find in Europe.

Bobby

Rob

6 months ago

“What matters are mass properties and ball speed.”

Concerning this statement in the article, has anything surpassed the Cobra King LTD? It’s the only driver that’s been made that had a CG below the neutral axis with a fairly high MOI. Not sure if others beat it in ballspeed but I’d guess it’s up there with everything else. Others have higher MOI but not as low center of gravity.

For a while, it looked like low CGNA was going to be big push. There was LTD, M1 440, but since then, I believe only Callaway Sub Zero (weight forward) and PXG 0811X (also weight forward) have dabbled in that space. I think we may see a couple pop up again in 2019.